BUt reasonable fear and great bodil harm are two different things. ONe is past tense the other is in the future.

Just because the bodily harm I've may have sustained up to the point I shot someone was not life-threatening doesn't mean there is not justified fear he isn't going to keep coming at me, even if standing.

I agree but the reasonableness of the fear increases as damaged-received increases and as the fight goes on (in time). It also increases if the other guy has weapons or a greater capability of doing harm. It also increases if you are unable to move, dodge, fight back (pinned).

Likewise, the reasonableness of such fear is diminished as these things (damage received, time elapsed, capability of weapon, one's immobility) are decreased.

Obviously any person could theoretically beat any other person to death with their fists. But to assume that anyone who gets punched a single time is "reasonable" to fear this end result simply makes the condition completely irrelevant.

07-02-2013, 05:10 PM

NCRAVEN

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

I hear ya. Obviously if someone punches me it's not lawful form me to feel shooting them in retaliation is justified. But if they punch me in the face and were still swinging (but maybe not connecting) and were still coming forward I may be justified in shooting them.

For the record though, while I did get my concealed carry permit and a situation like that ever happened (the one I just described) I highly dobt I would shoot someone.

07-03-2013, 05:51 AM

JAB1985

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

I hear ya. Obviously if someone punches me it's not lawful form me to feel shooting them in retaliation is justified. But if they punch me in the face and were still swinging (but maybe not connecting) and were still coming forward I may be justified in shooting them.

For the record though, while I did get my concealed carry permit and a situation like that ever happened (the one I just described) I highly dobt I would shoot someone.

with Rao's testimony (medical examiner) yesterday, basically saying she felt his injuries were "extremely insignificant" and that both injuries were consistent with one strike in her opinion (though admitted it was possible they were from more), itll be interesting to see how the jury weighs that. If you yourself are saying more than likely in the same situation you wouldnt pull the trigger but still feel he had the right do the 6 jurors all feel the same or do they weigh that in the same situation they may not have and decide he didnt?

07-03-2013, 06:33 AM

HoustonRaven

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Not sure why you're so fixated on just the strikes. Like all trials, it's going to come down to the totality of the event.

It's going to be the strikes AND his injuries AND his mouth and nose being covered AND Trayvon telling him he was going to die AND going for his gun.

All of that will be evidence for the jury to consider as well.

07-03-2013, 06:58 AM

JAB1985

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Not sure why you're so fixated on just the strikes. Like all trials, it's going to come down to the totality of the event.

It's going to be the strikes AND his injuries AND his mouth and nose being covered AND Trayvon telling him he was going to die AND going for his gun.

All of that will be evidence for the jury to consider as well.

im taking everything hes saying with a grain of salt, which you are not. everything you listed is what hes said about the events. what im pointing to is the evidence that will, or not, support his claim. So the number of strikes the resulting injuries are both large portions of that totality you speak of. covering his nose and telling him hes going to die and going for the gun arent supported by any evidence (nobody heard him say that, no physical evidence that he covered his nose or touched the gun) and based solely on his take of events, which even hes been inconsistent with (told friends and fox he grabbed the gun, told others he was near the gun). my point is just like how NC said it was his right, but wouldnt in the same situation, that could easily be how somebody on the jury feels and consider his actions excessive by weighing those more heavily in the totality of events.

07-03-2013, 07:04 AM

HoustonRaven

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Except the legal standard to use deadly force in Florida is HIS fear of death, thus HIS fear of death from those circumstances is evidence.

The burden of proof is on the state to say his perceptions and fears did not warrant him to shoot Trayvon.

07-03-2013, 07:16 AM

JAB1985

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Except the legal standard to use deadly force in Florida is HIS fear of death, thus HIS fear of death from those circumstances is evidence.

The burden of proof is on the state to say his perceptions and fears did not warrant him to shoot Trayvon.

Im not sure what youre arguing. what theyre saying by bringing in witnesses that say "his injuries were extremely insignificant" and the number of strikes being questioned to as little as one, is trying to prove that his perception and fear didnt warrant it. theyre not just bringing them in for the sake of it, its to discredit his opinion that his life was on the line.

07-03-2013, 07:25 AM

NCRAVEN

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAB1985

with Rao's testimony (medical examiner) yesterday, basically saying she felt his injuries were "extremely insignificant" and that both injuries were consistent with one strike in her opinion (though admitted it was possible they were from more), itll be interesting to see how the jury weighs that. If you yourself are saying more than likely in the same situation you wouldnt pull the trigger but still feel he had the right do the 6 jurors all feel the same or do they weigh that in the same situation they may not have and decide he didnt?

My saying I wouldn't shoot someone was in the scenario I described of a person throwing A punch and kept coming at me. I can say quite confidently if I was in the exact same situation as described by Zimmerman I would use my gun. I would never want to kill anyone but if I felt it came down to him or me, bye -bye.

07-03-2013, 12:04 PM

jonboy79

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

My saying I wouldn't shoot someone was in the scenario I described of a person throwing A punch and kept coming at me. I can say quite confidently if I was in the exact same situation as described by Zimmerman I would use my gun. I would never want to kill anyone but if I felt it came down to him or me, bye -bye.

I wear a gun daily at work. IF I can run, I will run, if I'm pinned down, and someone is reaching for said gun, they are dead.

07-03-2013, 12:40 PM

bmorebirds_24

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

My saying I wouldn't shoot someone was in the scenario I described of a person throwing A punch and kept coming at me. I can say quite confidently if I was in the exact same situation as described by Zimmerman I would use my gun. I would never want to kill anyone but if I felt it came down to him or me, bye -bye.

I'm with this.
If I feel serious harm is on its way and I need to react because I'm in fear of my life then I'm taking him out if the opportunity is there.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

07-03-2013, 12:47 PM

HoustonRaven

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

My saying I wouldn't shoot someone was in the scenario I described of a person throwing A punch and kept coming at me. I can say quite confidently if I was in the exact same situation as described by Zimmerman I would use my gun. I would never want to kill anyone but if I felt it came down to him or me, bye -bye.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonboy79

I wear a gun daily at work. IF I can run, I will run, if I'm pinned down, and someone is reaching for said gun, they are dead.

:word

07-03-2013, 02:42 PM

NCRAVEN

Re: George Zimmerman Trial

Anyone watching this today?!?!?

The State's witness testifying about DNA has basically said that Zimmerman's DNA from his blood was everywhere, or at least of the stains tested on Martin's shirt and Zimmerman's a lot were from Zimmerman.

I heard a CNN commentator at lunch say brinigng this witness on if it were a boxing match I'd think they were throwing in the towel.